About your Search

20110701
20110731
STATION
MSNBC 9
MSNBCW 4
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
fitsity still. there's no legislative language. it looks like what could be a pretty big tax increase. the spending cuts i think are highly uncertain. it instructs the various committees of the senate and the house to come up with these spending cuts. we have no assurance that they will do that. we have no idea how they'll do that. then we asked the senate to vote on that. all of which suggests to me there are a number of ways in which this could fall apart. i give these guys all the credit in the world for really struggling and trying to make some progress on a tough issue. there's no assurance that it results in an outcome. if we can't agree on spending cuts now, why should we suppose at the end of this process which after all has been available to us for two years the senate won't even pass a budget, why we think that this will result in real spending cuts is not clear to me. >> the other dynamic here is the mcconnell-reid proposal. that is going to get to the floor at some point. now the idea of being that the gang of six proposal is too late to be scored by cbo to really be put i
leaders are digging in on the big sticking point of taxes ahead of tomorrow's white house summit. chuck todd is nbc's chief white house correspondent and host of "the daily rundown." chuck, we've heard a lot from republicans. today at the bloomberg breakfast it was said that any tax measures had to be revenue positive over the long run that could be ten years out. eventually have to contribute toward deficit reduction. that is not what republican senator john cornyn was saying exactly the opposite what he said on our show yesterday that it has to be revenue neutral. how does the president hope to bridge this devoid? >> reporter: well, you know, they have an interesting tactic here. they believe and frankly behind the scenes so do house republicans believe it will be easier to sell a larger deal that has some things in it that nobody's crazy about on certain sides. whether some trims to entitlements on the democratic side or some of these revenue proposals on the republican side that if it's a large deal, $2.5 trillion to $4 trillion and maybe even $6 trillion in the out years meaning th
to ask the big oil companies to give up one dime not one dime of their $4 billion annual subsidy. they have refused to ask big corporations to give up one dime in their corporate loopholes. what we are negotiating with is a group of people who won't compromise. a group of people who have said we want the middle class to pay more taxes so that big corporations can pay less. we want seniors to lose their medicare so that big oil companies can continue to foost on their subdis. that's what the problem is. >> the case that republicans have taken a hard line on talks, at the same time democrats are taking what sounds like a hard line on entitlements. let me read a statement from leader pelosi that says we continue to oppose benefit cuts in social security and medicare. these pillars should not be used a as piggy bank to subsidize tax cuts for the wealthy. are democrats not just as guilty of failing to compromise as republicans are in this case? >> no, absolutely not. what we have said and i think most americans would agree with this is the middle class and seniors should not be asked
as well. so we need to do something big. >>> plus, decline of an empire? murdoch makes the cover of "time." the uk makes another arrest. and u.s. lawmakers demand investigations into news corp's actions here at home. >>> strikeout. why did the judge just declare a mistrial in the roger clemens' perjury case? >>> good day. i'm andrea mitchell live in washington. it's round five of the debt talks today. coming off the most heated exchange yet in the debt negotiations between president obama and republican leaders. eric cantor says the president all but stormed out of the last meeting. democrats have a different story. their version is that in fact, it was the republicans' fault. major garrett is congressional correspondent. here we are unveiling the cover as we do every week of the "national journal." let's talk about these negotiations. we've got he said/he said, basically. you have two sides accusing each other of storming out. it clearly got a little bit testy. >> it got testy -- >> we're told cantor interrupted the president several times. >> eric cantor was persistent, i'm sure. eric c
to comment until you see some specifics. i think that the bottom line is in terms of an overall deal, the big holdup here is the fact that republicans have kept revenues off the table completely, even eric cantor yesterday, people said well, it's a great thing he says maybe he'll do a few of these egregious loopholes in the law, corporate jets and yachts and stuff like this, but even there, he had another loophole put in the law and none of the money that would be -- that comes from closing these loopholes would be used to reduce the deficit. so it's one step forward, two steps back. if republicans are willing to entertain serious revenues, there's a real chance for a big deal. if they're not, there's no chance for a big deal and i can tell you this. democrats are not going to go for something that says we have all these cuts that we'll put in the budget now and maybe we'll get revenues down the road, the ways and means committee or the finance committee will decide those down the road. leader reid issued a statement that i think sums up our view, that there has to be balance between cuts and
the table, the problem is so big we won't bo able to fix it and the politics are such that it's going to be impossible to get everybody around the table to come one a deal. it really is time for everybody to put these lines in the sand aside and start trying to fix the problem, which is what i think is gang of six did this week breathes a lot of new life into this whole discussion of how do we fix this problem in a way to get a lot of people to sign on and by doing it smartly that's going to help tremendously. >> do you think that the market, the rating agencies and others looking at it from the outside will take it seriously if there is some sort of agreement, a handshake whatever you call it between the president and the speaker of the house that has 217 votes and can get through the house, that there's an agreement for things that will be triggered down the road, is that going to be good enough, tax reform down the road? >> there's a lot of risk. people tend not to believe politicians doing hard things later. at the same time we need to lift the debt ceiling. we need to do that rig
is prepared to shoot at big targets in afghanistan. it's a bad signal about how ready the pakistanis are to confront terror networks in their own country. >> jane harman from the woodrow wilson center, thank you very much. >>> and up next here, the arab uprising and the secret weapon being used to get around governments trying to silence the masses. >>> and still ahead, education nation, the battle over no child left behind in congress. my conversation with arne duncan here in aspen. [ woman ] we take it a day at a time. that's how it is with alzheimer's disease. she needs help from me. and her medication. the exelon patch -- it releases medication continuously for twenty-four hours. she uses one exelon patch daily for the treatment of mild to moderate alzheimer's symptoms. [ female announcer ] it cannot change the course of the disease. hospitalization and rarely death have been reported in patients who wore more than one patch at a time. the most common side effects of exelon patch are nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. the likelihood and severity of these side effects may increase as
to continue to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on subs cities for big oil companies, on tax cuts for the rich and on corporation tax loopholes, they are not interested in balanced budgets. they are interested in one thing and one thin only, making the rich much, much richer and making the middle class much, much poorer. that is why you get delay after delay after delay. that is why as the clock runs out instead of meeting in the middle they are lurching further and further to the extreme right wing. >> congressman, i know that -- we've heard political talking points from both sides. at this stage of emergency the american people want to see some action, the president said there is rough agreement between the two parties and likely the democrats and republicans in the senate are going to have to engage in negotiations with joe biden and others. where do you see this negotiation going? is the white house willing to concede a shorter term debt ceiling extension and deal with the two trenches that have been agreed to? where do you see it coming down? >> with all due respect this is n
, it made taxpayer funded bailouts illegal. so tax payers don't have to foot the bill if a big bank goes under. second, it said to wall street firms, you can't take the same kind of reckless risks that led to the crisis. and third, it put in place the stronger -- the strongest consumer protections in history. and make sure that these protections work so ordinary people were dealt with fairly so they could make informed decisions about their finances. we didn't just change the law. we changed the way the government did business. for years the job of protecting consumers was divided up in a lot of different agencies. so if you had a problem with the mortgage lender you called one place. if you had a problem with a credit card company, you called somebody else. it meant there were a lot of people who were, but that meant nobody was responsible. and we changed that. we cut the bureaucracy and put one consumer watchdog in charge with just one job. looking out for regular people in the financial system. this is an idea that i got from elizabeth warren who i first met years ago. back then this
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)